Macbook Pro 9600 vs PS3 (Ha Ha?)

[0098386]

at this point, id still say the ps3 is a much better gaming machine, and better games imo with a better setting (couch with friends vs crunched over a keyboard)

You're saying the PS3 is better than the whole PC gaming industry? A few hundred games versus literally millions, with countless more free games and access to emulators. You can hook a PC up to a TV, use any kind of controller, play games from 1990-present day, play without discs, use any brand of communication software.

A possible argument is which is the best between a PS3 and 360 but the PC is a megalith, a standard that is impossible to even aim at since it's been going so long and is already so much ahead of current gen consoles.

 

[kate-willbury]

You're saying the PS3 is better than the whole PC gaming industry? A few hundred games versus literally millions, with countless more free games and access to emulators. You can hook a PC up to a TV, use any kind of controller, play games from 1990-present day, play without discs, use any brand of communication software.

A possible argument is which is the best between a PS3 and 360 but the PC is a megalith, a standard that is impossible to even aim at since it's been going so long and is already so much ahead of current gen consoles.

better than the whole pc gaming industry? no. better than on a macbook? YES. which is what this thread is about.

 

[ayeying]

I would not recommend this site, coz things like gta 4(on that site it said that it is not playable) run smoothly on even nvidia 9400mGT(low settings) and (med to high settings) when using the 9600mGT. And even in low settings the game looks similar if not better than on my xbox 360 and ps3.

How does your GTA4 run in 9400? There's only 9600GT being used in boot camp.

 

[Jack Flash]

The 9600M GT will not produce the same gaming experience as the PS3. Mid range desktop PC parts can easily outstrip the PS3 and Xbox 360, but the MacBook Pro won't.

 

[JackAxe]

It only has to push 1280x720 at a low detail level at about 20 - 30fps to perform in the same range as the consoles, which that GPU can more than manage.

The MBPro's Core 2 proc is more than fast enough to feed that GPU.

 

[MagicWok]

The 9600m is a faster GPU than that used in the PS3 so i would expect a better visual experience and faster performance.

So much wrong with that sentence.

PS3 will never lose out to a MBP I'm afraid. They are totally different beasts, with different tasks meant for each.

I'd love it if my 17" MBP was as good as a PS3 for gaming, but under no allusion that it ever would be. Even if I stick an SSD and 8GB in there. My Mac Pro in my sig won't even reach near a PS3 for gaming visual quality.

On the other side, the PS3 would just stink and multi-taksing, and DTP programs that I run on my MBP/Mac Pro.

 

[monkey86]

macbook pro or ps3? thats a redundant question - the ps3 is built for games the mbp is a laptop computer - you will never get close to anything like the resolution or gmaeplay speed on a mbp - its not built solely for games like the ps3.

the graphics card in a laptop is better if its dedicated so i would go for the 15" 9600 but the ps3 is leagues ahead in gameplay.

 

[JackAxe]

So much wrong with that sentence.

PS3 will never lose out to a MBP I'm afraid. They are totally different beasts, with different tasks meant for each.

I'd love it if my 17" MBP was as good as a PS3 for gaming, but under no allusion that it ever would be. Even if I stick an SSD and 8GB in there. My Mac Pro in my sig won't even reach near a PS3 for gaming visual quality.

On the other side, the PS3 would just stink and multi-taksing, and DTP programs that I run on my MBP/Mac Pro.

You're really giving the PS3 way too much credit. Even a 3 year old PC with a 8800 GT trumps a PS3 on all fronts.

 

[JackAxe]

the graphics card in a laptop is better if its dedicated so i would go for the 15" 9600 but the ps3 is leagues ahead in gameplay.

Your gameplady comment is subjective, what if one doesn't like gaming on gamepad? Also, even if that's not the case, there's nothing stopping any modern comp from plugging into a TV -- nVidia's control panel has quite a few options for setting this up -- and all GFW titles must support a gamepad -- 360 pad or clone to be exact.

I personally prefer inputs that don't hinder my reaction, let alone my options, so I prefer the gameplay a PC offers.

 

[superspiffy]

I have an early 2008 MacBook Pro with the 8600m gt. I can tell you that it cannot even remotely compare to my Xbox 360 (let alone a PS3). There are games that run decently on it and there are games that run horribly. You can play most modern PC games like TF2, COD 4, Left4Dead, etc but often you have to sacrifice graphics settings, resolution, etc just to get it playable. And playability to me, is at least around 20-30 fps. Would you be happy playing a shooter on 25 fps with mediocre graphics?

I know the new MBPs have the 9600m gt, but that card is barely an improvement over mines. Maybe it'll be ok (at best) for games now, but what about the games coming out next year or in two years? On the other hand, the PS3 or Xbox 360 is guaranteed to play every single game that will ever be released for them as good as the games that were released for them since their launch day.

If you absolutely want a PC gaming rig, you can probably build/buy one for well under a 1000. It does churn slightly better graphics than the consoles but if you look up PC vs Xbox 360 vs PS3 comparison game shots, the differences are always minimal with the PC's graphics edging slightly. Keep in mind you probably have to update the gfx card every year or two to keep running new games on high.

So is the MBP a good gaming machine? No. (There are better/cheaper alternatives) Is it a decent one? Maybe. If you're fine with the graphical limitations: med settings, med res, mediocre fps... sure. Maybe you're on the go, or at a friend's house and you wanna LAN party Left4Dead, then go for it. (I do that.)

But even using it with this purpose, keep in mind that there are more powerful laptops designed from the ground up to be gaming machines, like Alienware, which are priced the same if not cheaper than MBPs. But gaming is not the focus of a MBP anyway. It's OS X. It's Final Cut Pro. It's Photoshop. It's ease of use. It's built quality. It's aesthetics. etc... But if you want to game on the side, it sure as hell can do that too, but it shouldn't be the main reason why you bought it in the first place.

 

[edddeduck]

I know the new MBPs have the 9600m gt, but that card is barely an improvement over mines.

Having to use both cards for testing and games development there is a performance leap between them, you will notice it in every game as you can run higher settings with better frame rates.

Neither card will make a MacBookPro Laptop (in Windows or Mac) out perform a dedicated console though.

If you absolutely want a PC gaming rig, you can probably build/buy one for well under a 1000.

If you want one that will definitely be a step up from a console you might want to stretch that budget a little Consoles are starting to get to the age where a good PC has better graphics but this is only starting to be the case and to get there you need some very nice hardware, the longer the consoles exist the more the PC will jump ahead.

Remember the end of the XBox and PS2 generation, the PC was way out in front but when the xbox and PS2 were released they had amazing graphics compared to most PCs. The same will happen again, one the PC's have a huge lead new consoles come out the cycle starts again.

Edwin

Feral

 

[BothBarsOn]

Thanks again for all the replies. Highly informative.

 

[0098386]

the ps3 is leagues ahead in gameplay.

Wrong. But I think you got your words mixed up. Gameplay isn't related to graphics or GPU power.

I can tell you that it cannot even remotely compare to my Xbox 360 (let alone a PS3).

This implies the PS3 has better graphics than an Xbox 360. FYI the Xbox 360 has the better graphics card (CPU; PS3. GPU; Xbox).

 

[Jack Flash]

You're really giving the PS3 way too much credit. Even a 3 year old PC with a 8800 GT trumps a PS3 on all fronts.

And that 3 year old PC with an 8800 GT trumps the MacBook Pro on all fronts, especially the GPU.

 

[superspiffy]

Verdict: Don't buy a laptop with the primary intention of playing demanding games.

Atleast... not until the day when you can upgrade the gfx card in it.

 

[Jack Flash]

It only has to push 1280x720 at a low detail level at about 20 - 30fps to perform in the same range as the consoles, which that GPU can more than manage.

The MBPro's Core 2 proc is more than fast enough to feed that GPU.

It needs to be doing 60 fps at a medium detail level to match the consoles, while running at resolutions ranging from 1024x600 to 1280x720.

The MacBook Pro can't keep up with a PS3 or Xbox 360. Don't mislead the OP.

 

[superspiffy]

It only has to push 1280x720 at a low detail level at about 20 - 30fps to perform in the same range as the consoles, which that GPU can more than manage.

The MBPro's Core 2 proc is more than fast enough to feed that GPU.

You're making it seem like the MacBook Pro is the benchmark by which the PS3 and Xbox 360 can be measured against. Where do you get your information?

 

[JackAxe]

It needs to be doing 60 fps at a medium detail level to match the consoles, while running at resolutions ranging from 1024x600 to 1280x720.

The MacBook Pro can't keep up with a PS3 or Xbox 360. Don't mislead the OP.

Oh really. Is this kind of along the lines that USB 2.0 can theoretically transfer 480 mbps...

Anyways, you might want to check out these videos of the PS3 and 360's average framerate on higher detailed games, so nothing dated like COD4, which runs blitzkrieg on most PCs:

RE5;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8nzv31uHLY

Tomb Rader Underworld;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H69P0TPY_-s&feature=related

Red Faction Gorilla;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTMHB4kUfuM&feature=related

GTAIV -- even has a PC reference(Runs at 1120x630 on the PS3 btw);
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0RS1vaHkdk&feature=related

Farcry 2;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHJQXwSILVk&feature=related

Considering most console games lack anti-aliasing, or choose a low-ball setting like 2x, or that their texture level is quite limited compared to a PC, and that most console games don't even turn on vsync, there's no way you're seeing medium detail on a console, more like low with a touch of medium.

And no disagreement on your comment about a 8800 GT trumping a MBPro, as even my last GPU a 9600 GT could do so, and it's about 13% slower than the mentioned GPU. But, the 9600m GT in the MBPro is still a good performer, a noticeable step up from the previous mobile GPUs from nVidia.

 

[JackAxe]

You're making it seem like the MacBook Pro is the benchmark by which the PS3 and Xbox 360 can be measured against. Where do you get your information?

I'm not really sure how you came to this conclusion?

 

[Jack Flash]

Oh really. Is this kind of along the lines that USB 2.0 can theoretically transfer 480 mbps...

Anyways, you might want to check out these videos of the PS3 and 360's average framerate on higher detailed games, so nothing dated like COD4, which runs blitzkrieg on most PCs:

RE5;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8nzv31uHLY

Tomb Rader Underworld;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H69P0TPY_-s&feature=related

Red Faction Gorilla;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTMHB4kUfuM&feature=related

GTAIV -- even has a PC reference(Runs at 1120x630 on the PS3 btw);
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0RS1vaHkdk&feature=related

Farcry 2;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHJQXwSILVk&feature=related

Considering most console games lack anti-aliasing, or choose a low-ball setting like 2x, or that their texture level is quite limited compared to a PC, and that most console games don't even turn on vsync, there's no way you're seeing medium detail on a console, more like low with a touch of medium.

And no disagreement on your comment about a 8800 GT trumping a MBPro, as even my last GPU a 9600 GT could do so, and it's about 13% slower than the mentioned GPU. But, the 9600m GT in the MBPro is still a good performer, a noticeable step up from the previous mobile GPUs from nVidia.

Without 9600M GT benchmarks it's hard to make a good comparison. But touché about the framerates of the consoles, in those specific titles. You also have to consider that the seating distance from the displayed image can make a factor in perception of overall image quality. Low vs Medium vs High textures matter much more when you're 12" from the screen than they do when you're 12'.

But yes, I agree, PC gaming does and always will produce better results with current hardware. Look at my signature again to see if we're on the same page. (For the record, I use 'lowball' antialiasing settings on my PC)

I still believe that a console is superior for games than is a MacBook Pro.

Not that games are all about graphics, anyway.

 

[JackAxe]

I found a video of a guy playing RE5 on a HP notebook with a 9600m GT. He's only running the game at 960x600, with some settings off, others on high, but it does a good job handling it;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bwpq8UEoGYc

Just a start I guess, but really not specific enough. :O

Yeah, I sit really close to my monitor, so generally max out the aliasing, which has not been an issue with these newer games optimized for consoles.

Screen tearing actually bothers me the most about gaming, that's why I always mention vsync.

For me it's the game type that determines weather or not I prefer gaming on a console or a PC, this is why I'm not completely sold on any console being a better gaming machine than even a MBPro. My best experiences have been on comps and it's always where I fall back after I've had my fill of what's new on the console front.

And I completely agree on the graphic comment. My favorite games to date are quite horrendous looking by today's standards. It's just fun to talk about this stuff online sometimes, well more often than not. :]

 

[monkey86]

Red Faction Gorilla;

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH that is epic

its Guerilla (like the freedom fighter - not the animal) although that would be a pretty fun game.

 

[monkey86]

Your gameplady comment is subjective, what if one doesn't like gaming on gamepad?

what the op was asking is how comparable the graphics chips were not about gamepads - i dont play games on a ps3 I use 360 and pc for gaming. Mac's were built for music, design and creation so thats what i use them for. The right tool for the right job.

 

[0098386]

It needs to be doing 60 fps at a medium detail level to match the consoles, while running at resolutions ranging from 1024x600 to 1280x720.

The MacBook Pro can't keep up with a PS3 or Xbox 360. Don't mislead the OP.

This implies that all console games run at 60fps. Games like GTA run at 25-30fps and thats on a sub 720p resolution on the PS3.

The only 1080p 60fps game I can think of (GT5P) looks terrible when you pause the game and see how low quality the textures are, there is no AA either and they cover up their sins using bloom. High poly count though.

 

[Jack Flash]

This implies that all console games run at 60fps. Games like GTA run at 25-30fps and thats on a sub 720p resolution on the PS3.

The only 1080p 60fps game I can think of (GT5P) looks terrible when you pause the game and see how low quality the textures are, there is no AA either and they cover up their sins using bloom. High poly count though.

But can the MacBook Pro produce better results? (Especially considering how much closer to the screen you are when on your laptop)

My (educated) guess is no.

And honestly, why are you pausing the game to look at the textures. To me that's ridiculous.